It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Military chaplain: Soldier's rape 'must have been God's will'

page: 8
41
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Okay let me rape that chaplain's daughter and see if he is calling it god's will or not?




posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jinglelord
I understand the hostility towards my viewpoint, in fact I expect it.


Actually I believe you were hoping for it with the way you set up your diatribe by using that worn out old "big strong man" excuse of 'some woman made me say stuff I din' wanna...whaaaaa'

Originally posted by Jinglelord
Look I'm trying insanely hard to be civil and mask my real opinion. How stupid does a woman have to be to join the military.........blabbity blah blah bla.


I guess you were not trying all that hard because it is all right there in that post right after crying about how hard you were trying.
If being provacative about women being raped in the military from your comfy computer chair helps you feel better about your role in this, then have at it. Please do not try and pretend to have understanding about it though.


First off I will repeat: The Chaplain did not condone the Rape nor did he say it was her fault. (Of course he could have but the evidence reported doesn't support that in my opinion)


Good thing you repeated something I was never arguing.



Secondly everything else is about personal responsibility If I go walking through a known bad neighborhood at night by myself I had better be extra aware and prepared to defend myself because there is a good chance I will get robbed, and if I do get robbed its my own damn fault for putting myself in that situation.


Personal responsibility does not also apply to the robber? Robbers and rapists are exempt from personal responsibility?


I would argue that your viewpoint is misogynistic.


And you would fail.


Are women assumed to be so weak and stupid that they are unable to foresee a realistic threat and prepare to defend themselves against it?


Not by me. Are they by you?


Society needs to stop teaching women how to be victims. But of course I'm the stupid one for thinking that women are somehow equal to men?


Spoken like every good feminist who blames the rape victim for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Where was she again? The US military. I was not aware that was a place where men were expected to rape women and were exempt from the personal responsibilty of that rape. Thanks for telling me that men think rape is ok in the military and you see women as such equals that they should just stay away from the rapefest that is the US military. Good point.



Apparently everyone wants to wander around in their fantasy land where nothing bad happens and if it does it is a horrible surprise. But see what happens when someone tries to say that women should be held in equal regard to men and be expected to use sense, be aware of their surroundings and fight back when attacked? Thats right I get insulted and told I obviously believe she deserved it and am supporting rapists.


You did say she deserved it. You got insulted for saying she deserved it. Also for saying it was a nonviolent rape. Not for your proud stance on equality


You are too funny.


I'm also going to tell you that if you use your credit card on an unsecured server you are stupid, but I'm not supporting identity theft. I believe criminals should be punished and held accountable for their actions. I also believe victims should be aware of their part and strive to protect themselves in the future.


So the US military is the same as some back alley full of rapists and the women you believe are equal to men should stay away or understand they will get raped and then should understand they deserved that rape because they knew they were getting into a rape fest by joining the military.

I do not even believe you believe what you are posting. You just like arguing with girls.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by SeventhSeal
Isn't organized religion just grand?

I'm not surprised but I am disgusted. Good find, man.


Actually, organized atheism puts organized religion to shame in it's statistics of mass murder and oppression. Just so we don't get carried away, here!



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


So we agree on one thing, that is for sure after all this stalking.




posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sinnthia
I feel less and less like we are discussing anything at all and more and more like you are just sharing.


A discussion IS sharing. That is all it ever is. Rather than share your own thoughts, you seem to only want to sit at the table and mock what everyone else is offering. Did you not bring any thoughts of your own to the discussion? We can all clearly see you are not satisfied with what is presented by others.


Originally posted by Sinnthia
That is all good and fine but I thought there was a topic here and you were trying to explain how I should be able to understand why this man said what he did. I am not sure what your personal disclosure has to do with the case you were making.


Well if you would have bothered to have read my original reply to this thread you would have seen that I did not agree with the way he handled the situation. What I tried to explain to you afterwards was why he may have handled it the way that he did. My personal disclosure was yet another attempt to get you to see that I would not have handled it the same as the man, but that I could understand why he did what he did. Not that it was correct, but that I understand.

From what I can tell, you are not here to understand anyone. Nor does it appear you wish to be understood. For you it is simply a game of mocking others, not communication.

So, with that, I leave you to the thread.

With Love,

Your Brother



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 04:20 PM
link   
saying " it's God's will for you to be raped" is like saying "it's God's will that she was murdered"

What's next? "It's God's will for the government to spy on you" or how about it's "God's will for a nuclear war"
Sheesh!



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by sara123123
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


So we agree on one thing, that is for sure after all this stalking.



Seriously, take a good long look at what you are doing. We have crossed paths in a whole TWO THREADS and you are saying you agree with me on something, but I am still a stalker. Aside from the fact that you had to follow me into this thread unless you cannot tell time and read dates...all you know we do NOT agree on is 1.5 topics and yet you seem to want to paint me as an enemy.

I hope we do not cross paths too much more then because I find I agree with people here far more than not. It just usually takes more than two threads to get there. Keep following me around and calling me stalker though, that should truly lead to some enlightening exchanges of knowledge.


Originally posted by IAMIAM
A discussion IS sharing. That is all it ever is.


Sharing pruning tips in a discussion about chess is not something I find useful.


Rather than share your own thoughts, you seem to only want to sit at the table and mock what everyone else is offering.


Not at all. I have offered my thoughts. What I did not do was pour out my childhood traumas and personal hells with no clear correlation to the topic or the point being made with regard to it. I will not do that either. Telling you things that happened to me in my past will not do anything to speak to the point of your god having a master plan as well as us having free will and thus her rape should somehow be found acceptable in the grand scheme of things. It is simply not acceptable to rape anyone at all ever. I am sorry you god sees a need for it in order to implement his "benevolent" plan but I refuse to adhere to any belief in any such logically challenged being in a position of omnipotence above me.


Did you not bring any thoughts of your own to the discussion? We can all clearly see you are not satisfied with what is presented by others.


Yes, that is actually where I began.


Well if you would have bothered to have read my original reply to this thread you would have seen that I did not agree with the way he handled the situation. What I tried to explain to you afterwards was why he may have handled it the way that he did.


I get all that. You seem to be upset by the fact that I did not just accept your explanation for what you THINK was his reasoning and go on my way. I do not buy it and felt I had the right and place to say so. I am sorry if I was mistaken in thinking anything other than thanks could find a place among all this.


My personal disclosure was yet another attempt to get you to see that I would not have handled it the same as the man, but that I could understand why he did what he did. Not that it was correct, but that I understand.


I wish you could see why that is so contradictory the way that I do. Your story did not correlate, nor did your reaction, nor your result. It is comparing apples to tapeworms in an attempt to explain how through different circumstances and different choices, I should understand a completely unrelated outcome of completely different circumstances.


From what I can tell, you are not here to understand anyone. Nor does it appear you wish to be understood. For you it is simply a game of mocking others, not communication.


Then you have already forgotten where this conversation actually began. Feel free to ask me about anything you feel I have not been clear on. I am not going to offer up childhood molestation tales if that is what your problem is. I have shared how I feel about this and why. Since then, I have been engaging you and responding to what you have been posting back to me.

That is how discussion works. You seem to want to share and me to accept. I am sharing my thoughts, my feelings, my opinions and you are complaining that I am not sharing anything? Are you just offering such personal tidbits in hopes to elicit equally salacious responses? I would assume not, but now I wonder.


So, with that, I leave you to the thread.

With Love,

Your Brother


Honestly, if you feel I need to start over with where this all began because something is not clear. Please feel free to ask. When you try to convince me of something and I respond, that is a discussion. If you wanted me to share more, instead of preaching, you should have been asking.

What did you ask me? Nothing. You just want me to read your posts and eat it up. I am sorry I cannot. It is not personal. I was interested in why anyone would even begin to justify what he said for him. I was more intrigued by the conviction with which a few of you seemed to be able to defend a man you do not know about something that is obviously lacking a great deal of context.

You guys picked up the ball and ran with it. I asked you about the game you were playing. You floundered. Now you complain that I did not answer questions no one asked and did not spill my guts about whether or not I was abused as a child or had a sick lover. ATS is not my diary. I see no relevance in "sharing" such things. I thanked you for doing so but when addressing the logic applied to it with regard to the point of this actual thread...I responded logically...to the logic of it all. That was the discussion we were having. You were trying to convince me it was logical for a human who can sit up straight to have this thought in their head for a valid reason. I am still looking for that valid reason and I am having trouble finding it in personal trivialities. I am looking for it in yours as you were so brave to share. Mine is not needed.
edit on 19-2-2011 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


How credible is the source? As someone else stated the quote came from an Atheist web-site so how come you can use Atheist web-sites but Christian web-sites are always not quotable?

Second thing is there are two ways the chaplain could have handled it:

1) Blame God, which is what usually happens when we don't want to take the blame.
2) Blame her for being with a bunch of guys who haven't had sex for well over a year. This would possibly lead to trust issues with men which will always haunt her.

Like I said, 2 ways to handle it. Let me ask you this how would you handle the situation in their shoes?

Third, many people claim eradicate religion and you get world peace. No! eradicate religion and you get a Stalin like country. Unless you guys can show how eliminating religion can bring about world peace than I don't think anyone should even mention it.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Equinox99
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


How credible is the source?


Here is a transcript of an interview she took part in where she elaborates on the situation. I have not made my whole way through it yet but she does say in the interview

“…..the Chaplain basically told me that it was God’s will for me to be raped and that I needed to get right with Him and go back to Church.”


Again, it is just her word but that no longer seems relevant since enough people have found good enough reason why a Christian Chaplain would say such a thing anyway. So no matter what religion he really was or if it really happened, it has been justified more than once here and that is the part that intrigues me more.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Justifying this is like justifying every psycho who's ever used the "God/Satan told me to do it" situation. If this was Gods will, then God is not benevolent. There is no excuse for forcing someone into such a situation.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sinnthia
What did you ask me? Nothing. You just want me to read your posts and eat it up. I am sorry I cannot. It is not personal. I was interested in why anyone would even begin to justify what he said for him. I was more intrigued by the conviction with which a few of you seemed to be able to defend a man you do not know about something that is obviously lacking a great deal of context.


Here is how I discuss things.

Suppose we are discussing an apple sitting on a table between us. I say to you I see a bright red shiny apple. If you then come back and say that I am being silly there is no way I could possibly see a bright red shiny apple, I have learned nothing about your point of view. I then say surely it is a bright red shiny apple, it is the shade of a fire engine. If you then retort, impossible! that is non-sense and what does a fire engine have to do with this, you are being ridiculous! I still have not learned what your point of view is, and I am growing weary of the conversations because there is absolutely no way you can crawl inside my head and tell me what I see. Attempting to do so IS ridiculous.

Now, if I say I see a bright red shiny apple, and you reply well I see a bright green apple, now I have learned your perspective, and you have learned mine. The conversation can progress. Well from my view the red apple looks like it may be a Washington apple, to which you could reply well that is interesting, but to me it appears to be a Granny Smith. Neither of us is wrong, and we have learned something about each others point of view.

You see, when we do nothing but put people on a constant defensive about how they see things, we learn nothing of the person, why they have the view they have, or even show the decency of allowing them to develop their views through mutually valued exchange. I am not here to justify my views to anyone. I prefer to share my views and learn from others their view. When someone gets domineering and wishes to exalt their view as THE correct one to have, then I withdraw because no one can crawl inside my head and tell me what I see. I cannot do this to anyone else either.

So back to the subject at hand, I agree with you that the Chaplain should not have said such a thing to a rape victim. It is callous and uncaring and contradictory to the religious teachings of all the worlds religions. A man of the cloth is supposed to be a healer and should have focused on caring for the emotional and spiritual well being of the victim.

Why do you think that he was in the wrong?

With Love,

Your Brother
edit on 19-2-2011 by IAMIAM because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


Whoa whoa whoa!

It just occurred to me I'm probably wrong in several places, am saying things completely wrong, and the point I was originally trying to make got completely lost in my petty little back and forth. I was trying to invoke hostility and I succeeded, I feel bad and I apologize.

The problem is I was trying to convey a viewpoint I only partially agree with and debating for the sake of debate.

The one and only point I am trying to convey here is that I feel it is possible the Chaplain is getting a bum rap and what he said has been misinterpreted. So what do I do? I start spouting without being clear and trying to use emotionally driven arguments I am not skilled enough to pull off.

I'll try to remain more focussed in the future.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Raist
 





It is never God's will that any harm befall anyone. There are reasons for things but God did not will it or cause it to happen.


If your god is the creator of all that there is, was or will ever be then it is the first cause and accountable for all action.

If Master Chief rapes one of the females then only an idiot would hold him to account and not Bungie.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 





No! eradicate religion and you get a Stalin like country. Unless you guys can show how eliminating religion can bring about world peace than I don't think anyone should even mention it.


Dude, there is no religion in my home and we all get along fine no Stalinists here I'm afraid, now if we expand that to a bigger family it does not necessarily mean that a tyrannical ideology would immediately arise.

Here is a marvelous story of a tribe of people without theistic religion who all get along quite fine most of the time, violence against each other is very rare, theft and murder hardly heard of and rape is something that unknown.




posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:37 PM
link   
lol divine providence? guess this means i better participate in church more

still i feel sorry for the gal. god's will? the chaplain must've been fantasising about her too



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by DevilJin
 


Your suggestion as to what the response would have been in the absence of religion is silly. You have know idea what they would say because we have never lived in a world without religion.

What the chaplain did proves exactly how stupid religion is. Humans are stupid, we will always be fighting over something for a long time. That does not mean we should ignore the problems humanity face. People who says thing like what you have said only allow the suffering in the world to continue.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 

Hi,

You do not see it.

You still ADD words to what I say... do you get that?

You ADD words to mine.. it Changes the meanings I intend... and then You argue against those Perceptions.. YOUR Perceptions.. not mine.. not what I said.

Do you see that yet?

All your arguing so far in this thread has been a case of You doing the same thing to most posters.... mincing the words so it apppears to fit your Belief about the poster's rely.

Time to put the brain in neutral.. stop thinking you are right.. and just read with Open Eyes.. because You are Missing the Points completely.

Your emotional response (A Reaction) is Blinding You. Stoping you from seeing the Simplicity on offer.

I do hope you are able one day to Perceive without having to Twist it to Fit Your Beliefs.

Be Well.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Jinglelord
 


I am curious. How do you think he was misinterpreted?

I think the Chaplain is perfectly illustrating the "problem of evil".



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by The Djin
 


Where do you live Utopia? Where on this Earth are there no religions...perhaps Antarctica but I am sure you aren't from there are you?

How about this, introduce that tribe to 2 other competing tribes and you'll watch an ongoing war. Once you put competition around in a time of survival you will see wars being waged.



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 


Competition requires scarcity. So as long as there is scarcity, you will probably find competition. Unless we are dealing with some very civilized creatures.
edit on 19-2-2011 by Marulo because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
41
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join